In A Perfect NFL World.....

[skinsguy]

Rookies would go through a probation period of two seasons signed to an NFL rookie league minimum with performance-based incentives. This allows rookies and second year players a chance to EARN their money through how well they perform. Also, rookies would be prohibited from hiring agents until this probation period is up or either they could hire an agent to work on contract talks for the third NFL season, but the agents cannot touch anything withthin the probation period.

Since alot of us feel that it takes most players 3 or 4 years to develop, I think this would help owners to invest their money more wisely into players that have proven they can be difference makers on the field. I think this would also lead to players appreciating their contracts more, because they're getting paid, not because of hype, but because of their performance. It also would allow teams to ditch players that turn out to be disappointments.

Now, I realize there would be a concern of health issues, which according to one of the Postons (take it for what it's worth) is their[the agents] major concern for players. Okay, I am not familar with the insurance policies with the NFL, so for now, I would assume that the individual players have some sort of insurance policy. However, in order for the player's union to accept this probation agreement, the NFL would cover the costs of probation players who get hurt on the field, and the teams would cover the cost of players who get hurt during practice.

That way, maybe it would justify the NFL's decision to force a two year probation period on new NFL players. I know alot of players would probably not go for this, but I think this would be pretty fair.

[aehs77]

then how would they pay for their bentley's

[TheMalcolmConnection]

With the NFL league minimum.

It ain't nothing to frown at...

[MTK]

Nice thought in a perfect world, but in this world there's now way the NFLPA would let teams/owners have so much power and control.

[mooby]

exactly. you are seeing it as a world where the teams/owners have all the control. what everyone wants is a league where everyone is happy, including the players. that is a good idea, it just won't happen. the best we can hope for is that they put some sort of restriction on the agents or player's themselves. maybe a limit for how much you can sign a player, so no player could hold out. if they said something like, okay, you can only get paid 50 million the most in this contract for this amount of years, we would see a lot of holdouts disappear.

[SmootSmack]

I think the NBA has something similar right where draft picks are locked into guaranteed 3-year deals (without free agent rights) with a limit on how much they can earn based on where they were drafted. This applies only to first round picks

Some say, however, that this is one reason so many players leave college early or skip it altogether-so that they can get to the second fatter contract that much sooner

[joethiesmanfan]

I don't know how fair that sounds? doesnt sound fair to me. I believe in free markets forget the cap pay what you can pay to who you can pay it to. Keep free agency as well. Let the free market system dictate who gets paid what by whom.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by mooby

exactly. you are seeing it as a world where the teams/owners have all the control. what everyone wants is a league where everyone is happy, including the players. that is a good idea, it just won't happen. the best we can hope for is that they put some sort of restriction on the agents or player's themselves. maybe a limit for how much you can sign a player, so no player could hold out. if they said something like, okay, you can only get paid 50 million the most in this contract for this amount of years, we would see a lot of holdouts disappear.

That sort of goes along with a suggestion I had in another thread about salary caps on players and not the team.

I realize with the player's union, they probably wouldn't go along with this, but if you had lets say, the first year rookie making a salary of $500,000 for the first year...that isn't too shabby considering alot of rookies will see limited action or no game play whatsoever. They still have extra monetary incentives that could be earned through how well they play, given the opportunity. The rookie could still see a pretty decent paycheck - and the great thing is he would earn it!

Yeah, the NFL doesn't want the owners and the teams to have so much control, but I believe at the sametime, the current policy is not working. The agents are having way too much control over things. I think this is hurting the NFL more than anything.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

I don't know how fair that sounds? doesnt sound fair to me. I believe in free markets forget the cap pay what you can pay to who you can pay it to. Keep free agency as well. Let the free market system dictate who gets paid what by whom.

Hahaha...I echoed that same sentiment, yet in another thread, but people said that would be unfair to the smaller market teams.

However, keep in mind, this is not about who can pay out the bigger contract, this is about players earning that contract and knowning that when it comes time for players to get that big contract, the players are earning it, and the team will feel more like they are not taking such a big chance on a player who hasn't had at least a couple years experience in the NFL. By the time the two years are up, the free market of the NFL would still decide how players are paid - the only difference is, you are paying a player for what he is worth.

[joethiesmanfan]

Actually the cap is giving these agents control.. for example what if let's say there is no salary cap and T.O. wants to hold out then the Eagles could just cut him. Meanwhile they have had rookies on their practice squad capable of just being plugged in and the offense still run fine.. by cutting him they cut his salary and have receivers who have been signed on the team making a considerable amount less but can fill the position therefore making his worth less. Cut him let someone else pay him they already have players making less than him ready to play as well so he has to lower his price and stop his bitching. Capitalism works great fellas.

[joethiesmanfan]

For smaller market teams have a luxury tax plus they are splitting the TV money dont let GreenBay fool you they are making lots of cash they have a nationwide fan base. Who cares if the /giants have all the T.O.'s that would help make player development more important and you could stack your rosters with good talent at a reasonable price. Keeping team continuity making the NFL a game based on being on a good team rather than just having good players. Stars will be made by play and teams will decide if they want to pay what the star is asking or not. right now there is a situation where mid level talent is eked out leaving team with a few BIG names and bunch of special team players the having someone ready to take your job and playing just as good as you will knock down some of this ego mess..

[FRPLG]

At the end of the day without a true free market then anything anyone comes up with is going to be imperfect based on what we all are desiring. It is why a free market works...there are no false market pressures changing the evironment. The problem is that leagues look at themselves as the "company" and not the teams. We all see the teams as the companies rather than the league. To create a real free market the teams would have to operate independent of each other which would mean some teams would fail and some would suceed(financially). The league is never going to let some of its teams fail when they view them as part of the overall product. I am all for a free market but sports should NOT BE a free market based on that thoery of thought. By nature of the corporate structure of sports it makes no sense for teams to compete at a labor level when it can destroy to product. Of course I also feel for players who have no say in where and who they work for. I don't know if there is any good answer to all of this other than to simply say that the league ought to be able to dictate it's own hiring practices at a league level since the company is the league(theoretically) and not the teams. But that seems totally unfiar to me at the player level. Who knows... Anyways there is no good solution. Anything anyone comes up with will simply create different problems that we may or may not be able to see right now.

[FRPLG]

I will say that the current system seems to have been working so why change it? The NFL is more poular than ever and parity is rampant. We may not like certain things that go on but we all keep going back. It is certainly better than the situation in baseball.

[joethiesmanfan]

true that's true people like Terrell Owens got the eagles in a bind because they cant cut him and he knows this. Maybe readjusting the cap we have can work or something?

[skinsguy]

Joetheismanfan:

I think you and I are kind of saying the samething, at least by how I am interpreting it. The only thing I am unclear on is, I had always felt that it was the contract that tied the team and the player together, and not so much a salary cap. I mean, going by what a contract is, a binding agreement, regardless of a presence or absense of a salary cap the team could not simply cut a player unless there was some language in that contract that said the team held the right to cut a player if he chose not to honor his side of the agreement.

With that said, with or without a cap, I woudn't believe a team could cut a player and not have to still pay him the remainder of his guaranteed money of his contract. I could be wrong on that, but I had just assumed that the salary cap was nothing more than a budget that each team could not exceed each season.

True, I think every policy put in place is going to have its pros and cons, but the way things are going right now, I see this agent stuff as being too much of a distraction among players and teams. It henders teams preparations during the offseason - which can in turn have an effect on the team's performance during the season.

But...all really I am concerned with is teams getting the most out of the players they pay for - not so much handicapping the player's finances long term.